Policy as code. Enforced at runtime. Audit evidence collected automatically.
Most data governance lives in Confluence and gets ignored. Logiciel's data governance platform makes policy enforceable at runtime - access controls, masking, retention, lineage, audit - all driven by code, not committee.
Common patterns:
CTOs evaluating us typically have:
An audit deadline (SOC 2, HIPAA, SOX, GDPR, state privacy) and inadequate evidence collection. Audit deadlines with inadequate evidence collection are a structural sign that documentation-only governance is overdue for replacement.
Compliance gaps that stall AI initiatives. Compliance-driven AI initiative blockers reflect runtime enforcement gaps, not documentation gaps; the fix is platform-level.
A board asking for defensible governance - not slides. Board-defensible governance requires runtime enforcement evidence, not slides; auditors increasingly look for the former.
Governance that's operational, not aspirational.
Trading data, risk models, regulatory reporting - sub-second SLAs and audit-ready governance.
Listing data, transaction pipelines, geospatial analytics - multi-source consolidation.
EHR integration, claims pipelines, clinical analytics - HIPAA-aware infrastructure.
Product analytics, customer 360, usage-based billing - embedded and operational data.
Inventory, pricing, order, and customer pipelines - real-time and high-throughput.
IoT, project, and supply-chain data - operational analytics on hybrid stacks.
| Dedicated Pod | Staff Augmentation | Project-Based Delivery |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded data engineering pod aligned to your sprint cadence - typically 3–6 engineers + a US lead. | Senior data engineers, architects, and SMEs slotted into your team to unblock specific work. | Fixed-scope, milestone-driven engagements with clear deliverables and outcomes. |
We map your stack, workloads, team, and constraints in a working session - not an RFP response.
Reference architecture grounded in your reality, with capacity, cost, and migration plans.
Iterative implementation with weekly demos, code reviews, and your team in the loop.
Managed operations or knowledge transfer - your choice. Both with US-aligned coverage.
Continuous tuning of cost, performance, and reliability against measurable SLAs.
Access, masking, retention defined in code.
Column-level lineage for governance and audit.
JIT access, approval flows, audit logged.
Applied at query time, not in batch.
Continuous evidence collection for SOC 2, HIPAA, SOX, GDPR.
Auto-classify, mask, monitor PII.
SOC 2 Type II, HIPAA, GDPR, SOX, GLBA, CCPA and other state privacy laws, BCBS 239, NIST CSF, EU AI Act, NYDFS Cybersecurity, FedRAMP-aligned, CMMC-aligned, 21 CFR Part 11 for life sciences, and industry-specific frameworks on request. For each framework, we provide pre-built control mappings, evidence collection workflows, and auditor-aligned report generation. Frameworks are continuously updated as regulations evolve (notable recent: EU AI Act, US AI Executive Order, new state privacy laws). For US customers in regulated industries, the framework coverage is typically a critical evaluation criterion; we publish detailed control mappings so audit and risk teams can validate fit before commitment. Custom frameworks are supported for industry-specific needs.
Sub-millisecond enforcement overhead for most cases. Policy evaluation is compiled to efficient query primitives (predicate pushdown, column-level masking) and cached aggressively. For typical analytical queries (seconds to tens of seconds), enforcement overhead is statistical noise. For high-frequency API queries (sub-100ms targets), we measure overhead carefully; in our published benchmarks, enforcement adds <2% to p99 latency for typical workloads. For customers comparing to Immuta or Privacera, overhead is typically lower because of tighter integration with the underlying data plane. We document the performance profile precisely so audit and engineering teams can validate enforcement doesn't compromise SLAs.
Yes - start with one domain, one regulatory framework, or one high-stakes dataset. Common starting patterns: a regulated workload (HIPAA-protected analytics, SOX-impacted financial reporting), a domain with high audit pain (financial close, customer data), or a specific risk (AI/ML model data lineage for EU AI Act readiness). Start with monitoring-only enforcement for 30-60 days to baseline current state and surprises. Move to soft enforcement (warnings) for another 60 days. Move to strict enforcement (blocks, masking) once the operational pattern is internalized. Most customers expand from initial pilot to comprehensive governance over 12-18 months.
Per asset tier - predictable for enterprise rollouts, with unlimited users and policy authors. Mid-market customers (5,000-20,000 governed assets) typically pay $50-130K ARR. Enterprise tiers (100,000+ assets, advanced frameworks, dedicated TAM, US-citizen-only support, audit liaison) start at $300K ARR. Pricing is transparent with workload-grounded TCO comparisons against Immuta, Privacera, and Collibra Protect at evaluation. Compared to building governance infrastructure in-house (typically a 5-10 engineer-year investment plus continuous regulatory tracking), the platform pays back quickly. For Fortune 500 governance scope, pricing scales appropriately to footprint.
Policies compile to query rewrites and access checks applied at query/API time, not in batch. When an analyst queries a table containing PII, the platform rewrites the query to apply masking policies (hashing, tokenization, redaction) based on the analyst's role and the data classification. When an application reads via API, access controls are evaluated and audit-logged in real time. The enforcement is cryptographically robust (you can't bypass by using a different query tool because policies live in the data plane, not the BI layer). For US regulated customers (financial services, healthcare), runtime enforcement is structurally different from documented-but-not-enforced policy - and audit teams notice the difference.
Tighter integration with broader data infrastructure - our governance is part of one platform that also handles ingestion, observability, lineage, catalog, and cost. Immuta and Privacera are pure-play access governance vendors; capable, but they sit on top of your data stack, requiring separate integration with each system. Logiciel's governance integrates with our pipeline orchestration, so policies travel with the data automatically. Engineering-friendly authoring (Git-native policies, Terraform support, API-first) reduces the friction that engineers experience with Immuta. Lower TCO at scale because consolidation eliminates separate vendor and integration overhead. We respect Immuta's market position; we differentiate on platform integration and engineering ergonomics.
Pre-built evidence packages for SOC 2, HIPAA, SOX, GDPR, EU AI Act, BCBS 239, and other major frameworks; auditor-ready exports generated on demand; documented control mappings; immutable audit logs. We've passed Big Four audits (Deloitte, PwC, EY, KPMG) on customer engagements where Logiciel was the primary evidence source for IT general controls. For US Federal customers, we provide GovCloud-aligned evidence packages. Audit support is included in standard enterprise tiers, not a separate SKU. For customers in their first SOC 2 Type II audit, we provide pre-audit readiness reviews and remediation guidance to reduce audit findings risk.
60-minute working session with a Logiciel governance lead. Output: gap analysis against your top regulatory frameworks and a remediation plan.
